Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-5vn5w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-24T15:26:47.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Tolerance of lamb and mouse oocytes to cryoprotectants during vitrification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2018

Jaqueline Sudiman*
Affiliation:
Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Victoria, Australia
Alice Lee
Affiliation:
Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Victoria, Australia
Kheng Ling Ong
Affiliation:
Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Victoria, Australia
Wu Zi Yuan
Affiliation:
Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Victoria, Australia
Sarah Jansen
Affiliation:
Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Victoria, Australia
Peter Temple-Smith
Affiliation:
Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Victoria, Australia
Mulyoto Pangestu
Affiliation:
Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Victoria, Australia
Sally Catt
Affiliation:
Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Victoria, Australia
*
Address for correspondence: Jaqueline Sudiman. Monash Institute of Medical Research, Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, Udayana University, Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia. Tel: +62 82283387245. E-mail: j_sudiman@yahoo.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Mouse and lamb oocytes were vitrified with, or exposed to, different cryoprotectants and evaluated for their effects on their survival and developmental competence after in vitro fertilization (IVF) and activation treatments. Control oocytes remained untreated, whilst the remainder were exposed to three different combinations of vitrification solutions [dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) + ethylene glycol (EG), EG only, or propanediol (PROH) + EG] and either vitrified or left unfrozen (exposed groups). Oocytes in the control and vitrified groups underwent IVF and developmental competence was assessed to the blastocyst stage. In lambs, survival rate in vitrified oocytes was significantly lower than for oocytes in the exposed groups (P <0.05). Blastocyst development was low in vitrified oocytes compared with controls (<6% vs 38.9%, P <0.01). Parthenogenetic activation was more prevalent in vitrified lamb oocytes compared with controls (P <0.05). No evidence of zona pellucida hardening or cortical granule exocytosis could account for reduced fertilization rates in vitrified lamb oocytes. Mouse oocytes demonstrated a completely different response to lamb oocytes, with survival and parthenogenetic activation rates unaffected by the vitrification process. Treatment of mouse oocytes with DMSO + EG yielded significantly higher survival and cleavage rates than treatment with PROH + EG (87.8% and 51.7% vs 32.7% and 16.7% respectively, P <0.01), however cleavage rate for vitrified oocytes remained lower than for the controls (51.7% vs 91.7%, P <0.01) as did mean blastocyst cell number (33 ± 3.1 vs 42 ± 1.5, P <0.05). From this study, it is clear that lamb and mouse show different tolerances to cryoprotectants commonly used in vitrification procedures, and careful selection and testing of species-compatible cryoprotectants is required when vitrifying oocytes to optimize survival and embryo development.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2018 
Figure 0

Figure 1 Fluorescence microscopy of vitrified-warmed lamb oocytes after insemination. The positions of pronuclei (PN) are marked with a green arrow and the polar body (PB) with a yellow arrow. (A) Parthenogenetic activation demonstrated by the presence of 1 PN and 1 PB. (B) Abnormal fertilization, with 1 PN, 2 PB and a sperm head is indicated by a red arrow. (C) Mature MII unfertilized oocyte with 1 PB and meiotic spindle is indicated by a pink arrow. (D) Normal fertilization indicated by 2 PN and 2 PB.

Figure 1

Table 1 Effect of different cryoprotectants and vitrification on survival and degeneration of lamb oocytes

Figure 2

Table 2 Effect of different cryoprotectants and vitrification on survival and degeneration of mouse oocytes

Figure 3

Table 3 Effect of different cryoprotectants and vitrification on normal and abnormal fertilization, and parthenogenetic activation of lamb oocytes

Figure 4

Table 4 Effect of different cryoprotectants, vitrification and induced chemical activation in the absence of sperm on mouse oocyte development

Figure 5

Table 5 Effect of different cryoprotectants and vitrification on lamb oocyte developmental competence

Figure 6

Table 6 Effect of different cryoprotectants and vitrification on mouse oocyte developmental competence

Figure 7

Figure 2 Grey level intensity of fresh control and vitrified-warmed oocytes (DMSO + EG and PROH + EG) stained with fluorescein isothiocyanate conjugated to Lens culinaris agglutinin (FITC–LCA) to demonstrate the presence of α-d-mannose and α-d-glucose in cortical granules. Different superscripts denote significant differences (P <0.05).

Figure 8

Figure 3 Cortical granules in lamb oocytes. Cross-sections of lamb oocytes labelled with FITC–LCA to stain cortical granules and imaged at a depth of 20 μm from the plasma membrane. Cortical granules in control oocytes (A) were identified at the cortical edge of control oocytes, about 2 μm beneath the oolemma with very little staining within the cytoplasm. Oocytes vitrified using DMSO + EG (B) and PROH + EG (C) exhibit diffuse cortical granule staining throughout the cytoplasm. Negative controls (D) exhibited no autofluorescence.

Figure 9

Figure 4 Zona pellucida digestion time (s) for lamb oocytes. Zona pellucida dissolving time (mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM)) in fresh control and vitrified-warmed lamb oocytes (DMSO + EG and PROH + EG) are not significantly different between groups.